Jump to content

Canadiens Re-Sign Antti Niemi


Commandant

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

You're missing the point.

 

The team isn't pinching pennies in terms of actual dollars spent.  They are only concerned with the Salary cap.  Another 950K isn't what they look at, it's the cap hit.

Unless he's buried in the minors, how is this not a 950k cap hit 

 

10 hours ago, JGC21 said:

Are people seriously arguing over $950k spent on a veteran back-up...?   Either it’s a slow Habs news day or Bergevin is the anti-christ.

It's Neimi type deals, when Radulov couldn't be signed because of pennies on the dollar. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Habopotamus said:

Unless he's buried in the minors, how is this not a 950k cap hit 

 

It's Neimi type deals, when Radulov couldn't be signed because of pennies on the dollar. 

Because if niemi is on the team, Lindgren is in the minors. His cap hit of 750 or whatever is subtracted. Difference of 200 or so.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Habopotamus said:

It's Neimi type deals, when Radulov couldn't be signed because of pennies on the dollar. 

...and perhaps because he wanted to play elsewhere and found a GM to overpay in term for a guy with a pretty sketchy track record (basically same issue many have with offering Pacioretty a long term deal at his "advanced age", except Max has been nothing but loyal to Habs...unlike the Russian).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Habopotamus said:

Unless he's buried in the minors, how is this not a 950k cap hit 

 

It's Neimi type deals, when Radulov couldn't be signed because of pennies on the dollar. 

 

You need a backup goalie.  That isnt free.  So its either lindgren at 750k cap hit or niemi at 950.  The difference is negligible.

 

One will be on the team and one will be in the minors.

 

You arent running a team with no backup and saving that cap hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DON said:

...and perhaps because he wanted to play elsewhere and found a GM to overpay in term for a guy with a pretty sketchy track record (basically same issue many have with offering Pacioretty a long term deal at his "advanced age", except Max has been nothing but loyal to Habs...unlike the Russian).

If MB tried to lock up Rad for 6 years in Jan Feb, but was unable,  you can't really fault him. If (I believe this probably happened ) he stalled and low balled and was smug and disrespectful early, it's on MB. 

 

The only way I trade pacioretty is if he brings back a potential #1 centre.  Otherwise 7 mill for 6 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BCHabnut said:

 If (I believe this probably happened ) he stalled and low balled and was smug and disrespectful early, it's on MB. 

 

Based on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DON said:

Based on?

Mostly just how he said that early in the season,  rad was asking too much. He then waited until the off season and told both him and markov " first come first served" from my perspective that comes off as an apathetic approach. Like saying

" Meh. I could take you or leave you. Makes no difference to me"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Habopotamus said:

I forgot that Lindgren can be sent down without waivers 

 

Thanks for the -1 though

 

The idea that it was either/or, Lindgren or Niemi on the roster has been posted multiple times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Habopotamus said:

Funny how I always see you crying about -1 being handed out, yet you do it yourself.... 

 

I hand them out very rarely and never for just disagreeing with someone. 

 

However, when you are repeatedly proven that your assumption is wrong and you keep insisting on bringing it up over and over that this contract is costing the team a million on the cap.... then yes... your stubborness that you want to keep arguing the point, is rewarded.  

 

I even gave you a +1 when you finally admitted that yes, Lindgren can go to the minors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BCHabnut said:

Mostly just how he said that early in the season,  rad was asking too much. He then waited until the off season and told both him and markov " first come first served" from my perspective that comes off as an apathetic approach. Like saying

" Meh. I could take you or leave you. Makes no difference to me"

He also said he offered same as Dallas, so how can that be disrespectful and to offer a blank cheque to a 'flighty' Russian likely isn't best way to do business. BUT, agree and exact same as with Markov, he should of had a back up plan that wasn't a washed up guy as plan B. No argument he dropped the ball and had a horrible off-season (and poor trade deadline as well).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

I hand them out very rarely and never for just disagreeing with someone. 

 

However, when you are repeatedly proven that your assumption is wrong and you keep insisting on bringing it up over and over that this contract is costing the team a million on the cap.... then yes... your stubborness that you want to keep arguing the point, is rewarded.  

 

I even gave you a +1 when you finally admitted that yes, Lindgren can go to the minors.

My point is about million dollar contracts being handed out to depth players, but when an extra bit needs to be given to the real meat of a hockey team, the money is just to thin to make work.

 

The entire Neimi contract isn't so much my problem. 

 

 I will stop flooding the board though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Habopotamus said:

My point is about million dollar contracts being handed out to depth players, but when an extra bit needs to be given to the real meat of a hockey team, the money is just to thin to make work. 

 

 I will stop flooding the board though. 

 

And my point is that you need to pay a backup goalie... so that million dollars is already spent, its just a question of who you spend it on.  

An NHL backup goalie is necessary for a team... and is going to cost close to a million.... 

If you want to margue that Bergevin gave too much money to a third liner in Andrew Shaw, or to a defensive defenceman in Karl Alzner, but can't spend it on the first line... I agree with that.

But the fourth liners at a million, or the backup goalie at a million... that position is needed and he needs to pay that minimum amount.  Its not like he can say, hey Price just play 82 games, we don't need a backup and we can save $1 million by doing this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Habopotamus said:

My point is about million dollar contracts being handed out to depth players, but when an extra bit needs to be given to the real meat of a hockey team, the money is just to thin to make work.

The entire Neimi contract isn't so much my problem. 

 

 I will stop flooding the board though. 

 

A hill I will die on with you in regards to guys like Deslauriers, Schlemko, and Shaw. 

 

But it's likely that Niemi would have gotten the same contract elsewhere this summer based on his play in Montreal. And if Niemi outplays Lindgren, he'll be worth the extra $200 000. If he doesn't, he's the best paid player in Laval, and it doesn't affect the Habs' cap situation at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DON said:

He also said he offered same as Dallas, so how can that be disrespectful and to offer a blank cheque to a 'flighty' Russian likely isn't best way to do business. BUT, agree and exact same as with Markov, he should of had a back up plan that wasn't a washed up guy as plan B. No argument he dropped the ball and had a horrible off-season (and poor trade deadline as well).

But it is fine to over pay in $ and terms for a good ol’ Canadian boy shaky 6th dman!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

But it is fine to over pay in $ and terms for a good ol’ Canadian boy shaky 6th dman!?

 

Well you see, after the horrific loss of Alexei Emelin to the thieving Vegas Golden Knights, the Canadiens were desperate for a hero. And that hero came in the form of Washington Capitals jar opener Karl Alzner. Without Karl Alzner, this club would be unable to ever repeat the success of the previous season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

But it is fine to over pay in $ and terms for a good ol’ Canadian boy shaky 6th dman!?

If you say so. But,  I would disagree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DON said:

...and perhaps because he wanted to play elsewhere and found a GM to overpay in term for a guy with a pretty sketchy track record (basically same issue many have with offering Pacioretty a long term deal at his "advanced age", except Max has been nothing but loyal to Habs...unlike the Russian).

 

 

....and "the Russian" works hard every single night and does the dirty work to help his linemates produce more, unlike Max.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sbhatt said:

 

 

....and "the Russian" works hard every single night and does the dirty work to help his linemates produce more, unlike Max.

He plays all of 0:01 on the PK/game, unlike the Hab who plays a ton on the PK as well as PP. So not sure what dirty work you are referring to, obviously you only mean at one of ice not both?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Max has always driven possession on his line.  Almost universally, those who play with him have better possession stats with him, then playing with others on the time. 

 

He's one of very few (about 6-10) NHL wingers with the ability to have a big positive influence on the possession stats of their linemates. 

 

The idea that he doesn't do the dirty work to help his linemates produce more, is nothing more than sheer lunacy.  Actual facts and numbers show the exact opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

And my point is that you need to pay a backup goalie... so that million dollars is already spent, its just a question of who you spend it on.  

An NHL backup goalie is necessary for a team... and is going to cost close to a million.... 

If you want to margue that Bergevin gave too much money to a third liner in Andrew Shaw, or to a defensive defenceman in Karl Alzner, but can't spend it on the first line... I agree with that.

But the fourth liners at a million, or the backup goalie at a million... that position is needed and he needs to pay that minimum amount.  Its not like he can say, hey Price just play 82 games, we don't need a backup and we can save $1 million by doing this. 

 

We're talking about a contract that is $300 000 over the league minimum. I can't believe there is an argument about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

We're talking about a contract that is $300 000 over the league minimum. I can't believe there is an argument about it.

 

Seriously.  It’s not like MB signed Plekanec to a $950k deal.

 

Wait until July 1st for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...